Counterfeiting of money, banknotes, stock certificates, bond certificates, debit cards, credit cards, identification cards, social security cards, health insurance cards, immigration documents, transit passes, visas, auto parts, aircraft components, software, computer chips, consumer goods, to name simply a few, cost individuals, businesses, organizations, and countries billions of dollars each year. Similarly, fraud committed by people using a fake identity or the identity of another has become increasingly costly and burdensome to society.
Many technologies have been developed in response to such counterfeiting and fraud. Examples of such technologies include bar codes, magnetic strips encoded with authentication information, electronic “smart” cards having embedded integrated circuits that store authentication information, laser cards, and holograms. However, bar codes can easily be scanned and replicated using even the most rudimentary scanning and printing equipment. While more secure, magnetic strip readers and encoders are readily available and magnetic strip controls can be easily forged.
While “smart” cards are very sophisticated, their technology can also be copied. For example, their authentication information is an electronic key contained within the card that can always be broken because these cards are based on standard microcontrollers, typically of 8-bit construction, that can be reprogrammed. In addition, generic reprogrammable cards are widely available and can be used to mimic the performance of any “smart” card.
Laser cards suffer from similar, if not worse, drawbacks. This is because laser cards rely on technology virtually identical to the technology used to make compact discs. Thus, a laser can be used to scan the encoded surface of the card to record the key and any other authentication information that later can be easily replicated on blank laser cards.
Holograms on labels are affixed to goods, cards, tags, and other articles to provide a visual indication of authenticity. For example, holograms are commonly applied to credit cards and clothing tags so that a merchant will know by looking at the hologram that a card or article of clothing used in a purchase is not counterfeit.
Unfortunately, modern technology has rendered holograms relatively easy to copy and mass produce primarily because holograms possess limited information and are comprised of embossed surface structures. The use of redundant information dramatically decreases the complexity and security of a hologram because it decreases the amount of information stored. This is because thermal embossing techniques used to produce holograms limit the depth of their structure essentially to the surface of the label. Such thermal embossing techniques cannot produce a much more sophisticated hologram because the label material is made of many different moieties and thermal distortion during embossing limits the depth of the structure that can be embossed essentially to the surface. As a result, digital scanners and holographic copying machines can be used to scan a hologram and mass produce it rendering its security effectively meaningless. Also, the holograph embossed into the label can be hardened and then used as a pseudomaster for use in duplicating the hologram in a standard holographic copier.
Finally, since authentication of holograms is done visually, there is no statistically reliable method of verifying its authenticity. As a result, even counterfeit holograms of poor quality may pass visual inspection by a merchant. As a result of these many drawbacks it is obvious why holograms have become less and less useful as a deterrent to counterfeiting.
What is needed is a method of authentication that cannot be easily copied or replicated by a counterfeiter. What is preferably needed is an authentication method that is impossible to copy or replicate. What is also needed is a label or applique' that can be replicated with high aspect two-dimensional or volume surface structures that can extend below its surface so as to more securely store authentication information. What is still further needed is a label or applique' that masks the authentication information to make it difficult, if not impossible, to copy. What is also needed is a label or applique' having these characteristics that is read by a reader that positively verifies its authenticity. What is still also needed is such a label or applique' that can record either or both key authentication information and biometric authentication information.